OK, the situation in Poland is not ironic. What is the conflict there? In fact, the parliament elected judges, but the president did not take an oath and on this basis declares them illegitimate. Here is a clash of ideas about what power should be based on. Conflict of will and ritual. If you think that power should be based on expression of will, on some kind of social contract, then Parliament and the Court are of course right. Because the source of power is the people, the people chose the deputies, the deputies chose the judges. If you think that power should be based on sacred rituals, on some kind of sacred action, on ritual, then the president is right here, of course. A judge is made a judge not by the will of the people and the delegates, but by a ceremony in which the president introduces him to the judicial system. And the judge therefore depends not on the will of the people, but on the will of the president. The president sabotaged the ceremony - the judge did not become a judge. Here you have to decide what comes first - the ceremony or the will of the people. But if the ceremony is the main thing for you, then there is a country like Russia. There, elections are held as a mere ritual, and the will of the people is left to itself. Then, it turns out, everything is fine there, the ceremony is primary and more important than the will of the people. As far as I'm concerned, the expression of desire is primary, because of course I'm in favor of the parliament here, even though I don't understand the situation at all, and I don't know who Samos is and who isn't. But my principle is that the ceremony means nothing, the ceremony is only a form, a cover, a candy wrapper, but what is really important is the will of the people, the essence of the election process, and not its form. And if form and ceremony are more important to you, then you are fetishists. Not in the sexual sense, but in the religious and ideological sense. You endow the symbols with some kind of magical mystical power.